Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker, a subscription product from McDermott+Consulting.
Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Medicare Payment Cuts; Other
- In six cases related to Medicare payment cuts, the Court ordered the cases stayed for an additional 30 days.
- In a case regarding a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted intervenor-defendant’s motion to intervene.
- In the same case regarding a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the intervenor-defendant state primary care association filed a proposed answer in intervention to plaintiff pharmaceutical companies’ first amended complaint.
- In a case against HRSA filed by a group of 340B covered entities seeking relief from HRSA’s recent change in its policy on child sites, HRSA filed its cross-motion for summary judgment and a memorandum in opposition to the covered entity plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.
- On March 12, 2024, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in a case challenging a state law requiring drug manufacturers to sell 340B drugs for dispensing through contract pharmacy agreements, affirming the decision of the district court in favor of the state.
[View source.]
